1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Intelligence Analysts Say (Iraq) War Spread Terrorism

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by insane man, Sep 23, 2006.

Tags:
Page 1 of 2
  1. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    i mean who could have predicted this. except anyone with an elementary knowledge about the region and half a brain.


    Spy Agencies Say Iraq War Hurting U.S. Terror Fight

    By Karen DeYoung
    Washington Post Staff Writer
    Sunday, September 24, 2006; A01

    The war in Iraq has become a primary recruitment vehicle for violent Islamic extremists, motivating a new generation of potential terrorists around the world whose numbers may be increasing faster than the United States and its allies can reduce the threat, U.S. intelligence analysts have concluded.

    A 30-page National Intelligence Estimate completed in April cites the "centrality" of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the insurgency that has followed, as the leading inspiration for new Islamic extremist networks and cells that are united by little more than an anti-Western agenda. Rather than contributing to eventual victory in the global counterterrorism struggle, it concludes that the situation in Iraq has worsened the U.S. position, according to officials familiar with the classified document.

    "It's a very candid assessment," one intelligence official said yesterday of the estimate, the first formal examination of global terrorist trends written by the National Intelligence Council since the March 2003 invasion. "It's stating the obvious."

    The NIE, whose contents were first reported by the New York Times, coincides with public statements by senior intelligence officials describing a different kind of conflict than the one outlined by President Bush in a series of recent speeches marking the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

    "Together with our coalition partners," Bush said in an address earlier this month to the Military Officers Association of America, "we've removed terrorist sanctuaries, disrupted their finances, killed and captured key operatives, broken up terrorist cells in America and other nations, and stopped new attacks before they're carried out. We're on the offense against the terrorists on every battlefront, and we'll accept nothing less than complete victory."

    But the battlefronts intelligence analysts depict are far more impenetrable and difficult, if not impossible, to combat with the standard tools of warfare.

    Although intelligence officials agree that the United States has seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qaeda and disrupted its ability to plan and direct major operations, radical Islamic networks have spread and decentralized.

    Many of the new cells, the NIE concludes, have no connection to any central structure and arose independently. The members of the cells communicate only among themselves and derive their inspiration, ideology and tactics from the more than 5,000 radical Islamic Web sites. They spread the message that the Iraq war is a Western attempt to conquer Islam by first occupying Iraq and establishing a permanent presence in the Middle East.

    The April NIE, titled "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States," does not offer policy prescriptions.

    "What these guys at NIC are supposed to do is to lay it out in very clear, understandable terms," said the intelligence official. "It's not the role of the NIC to offer recommendations." Rather, it "basically states the conditions" as the intelligence community sees them, he said.

    This official and others would only discuss intelligence analyses on the condition of anonymity.

    The National Intelligence Council is tasked with providing long-term assessments of strategic issues for the president and senior policymakers in the form of National Intelligence Estimates. Composed of current and former senior intelligence and national security officials, it is currently chaired by Thomas Fingar, the former head of the State Department's intelligence bureau and now deputy for analysis to Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte.

    An NIE drawn up in the fall of 2002 concluded that Iraq had "continued its weapons of mass destruction [WMD] programs," possessed stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons and "probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade." All of those judgments, which provided the political and national security underpinnings for the Iraq invasion, turned out to be false.

    As part of the intelligence reforms enacted in 2004, control of the NIC was transferred from the CIA director to Negroponte's newly created office, with a mandate to cast a wider net for information throughout the 16-agency intelligence community and among nongovernmental experts.

    Negroponte announced last month that the council would begin drafting a new NIE on Iraq in response to a request from the Senate intelligence committee. That estimate is still in the early planning stages, intelligence officials said yesterday. But though the April NIE does not deal specifically with conditions in Iraq, many of its judgments emphasize the influence of the Iraq war on the spread of global terrorism.

    According to officials familiar with the document, it describes the situation in Iraq as promoting the spread of radical Islam by providing a focal point, with constant reinforcement of an anti-American message for disaffected Muslims. The Web sites provide a narrative of a war with frequent victories for the insurgents, and describe an occupation that they say regularly targets Islam and its adherents. They also distribute increasingly frequent and sophisticated messages from al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, urging Muslims wherever they are to take up arms against the "Crusaders" on behalf of Iraq.

    Both Bush and bin Laden now regularly describe the Iraq war as the "central front" of the global war, and both are depending on victory there to set the direction of future struggles far afield. Although intelligence officials believe bin Laden's ability to direct major terrorist operations has been greatly diminished, his status as the ideological leader of a global movement that appeals to disaffected Muslims has vastly increased.

    The conclusions and tone of the NIE have been reflected in a number of public statements by senior intelligence officials this year. In a February speech at Georgetown University, Negroponte said: "My colleagues and I still view the global jihadist terrorist movement, which emerged from the Afghan-Soviet conflict in the 1980s but is today inspired and led by al Qaeda, as the preeminent threat to our citizens, homeland interests and friends."

    In a sober and comprehensive address to an armed forces group in Texas in April, Gen. Michael V. Hayden, then-deputy to Negroponte and now CIA director, drew heavily from the NIE judgments. If current trends continued, Hayden said, "threats to the U.S. at home and abroad will become more diverse and that could lead to increasing attacks worldwide."

    Before delivering the speech, an intelligence official said, Hayden spoke directly to the NIE authors, saying, "I want to make these points" to a public audience.

    A series of intelligence assessments on Iraq since the faulty 2002 estimate have portrayed increasingly bleak prospects for democracy-building and stability there.

    Even before the invasion, the NIC warned in January 2003 that the aftermath of regime change could include long-term internal conflict. A July 2004 NIE outlined a range of possible outcomes to the increasingly difficult security situation there, with the best prospect a government with only tenuous control and the worst a civil war.

    National Intelligence Estimates have often sparked controversy, both for what they have said and what they have omitted. A 1997 estimate, the last on global terrorism before the 2001 al-Qaeda attacks, mentioned bin Laden in only three sentences, describing him only as a "terrorist financier" and making no reference at all to al-Qaeda.

    The latest terrorism assessment paints a portrait of a global war in which Iraq is less the central front of actual combat than a unifying battle cry for disparate extremist groups and even individuals. "It is just those kinetic actions that lead to the radicalization of others," a senior counterterrorism official said earlier this summer. "Surgical strikes? Nothing is surgical about military operations. They tend to have impacts, affects."

    That description contrasts with Bush's emphasis this month on offensive military action military battles in Iraq and elsewhere as the United States' principal road to victory in the global war.

    "Many Americans . . . ask the same question five years after 9/11," he said in an speech in Atlanta earlier this month. "The answer is yes. America is safer. We are safer because we have taken action to protect the homeland. We are safer because we are on the offensive against our enemies overseas. We're safer because of the skill and sacrifice of the brave Americans who defend our people."

    But "a really big hole" in the U.S. strategy, a second counterterrorism official said, "is that we focus on the terrorists and very little on how they are created. If you looked at all the resources of the U.S. government, we spent 85, 90 percent on current terrorists, not on how people are radicalized."

    Staff writers Dafna Linzer and Thomas E. Ricks and staff researcher Magda Jean-Louis contributed to this report.

    © 2006 The Washington Post Company
    post
     
    #1 insane man, Sep 23, 2006
  2. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,198
    Likes Received:
    15,367
    The other day I saw what has to be the creepiest, most sureal thing I have ever seen in my life on the Discovery Channel.

    <object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fg4_MuV4MpY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fg4_MuV4MpY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

    When the CIA feels the need to advertise on TV something is horribly wrong with the world and our government.
     
    #2 Ottomaton, Sep 24, 2006
  3. Oski2005

    Oski2005 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2001
    Messages:
    18,100
    Likes Received:
    447
    I'm surprised this isn't a bigger topic around here. This completely undermines everything Bush has been trying to sell us and is exactly what many people, including people on this board have been saying all along. Of course, I already know that the response will be about how the CIA screwed up, that they had bad intel and that's why we are in Iraq even though we all know that the intel was cherry picked by the admin and so on and so forth.

    As for that commercial, it is silly looking, but the CIA doesn't have competative salaries. They have to try and reach people somehow.
     
    #3 Oski2005, Sep 24, 2006
  4. vwiggin

    vwiggin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    2
    It is funny how Bush kept lowering the standards for his war justifications and yet still fails every. single. time.

    WMDs? No.
    Links to Bin Ladin? no.
    Stabilize the region? no.
    Check Iranian ambitions? no.

    Make America safer? Hell no.
     
    #4 vwiggin, Sep 24, 2006
  5. NewYorker

    NewYorker Ghost of Clutch Fans

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    41
    And yet he is still in power. If repubs maintain control of the house and senate in November....Bush for all of his flaws...will be credited as a master politician.
     
    #5 NewYorker, Sep 24, 2006
  6. canoner2002

    canoner2002 Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    Messages:
    4,069
    Likes Received:
    1
    If that happened, it is only because republicans redrew districts to make their seats safer.
     
    #6 canoner2002, Sep 24, 2006
  7. vwiggin

    vwiggin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think we have to stop blaming all our problems on Bush or the Republicans. Sure, they are the ones who initiated this Iraq mess, but to be honest, what have I done to stop them beyond just the voting and the protesting?

    Why aren't we rioting out in the streets to demand fair voting machines? Why aren't we refusing to pay any more taxes until the governmenr promises to stop torturing people? Why aren't we moving to another country until we have assurances that our own government isn't illegally monitoring our conversations?

    The moderates and liberals have grown complacent. And, to no small extent, I think a small part of me IS manipulated by Bush's fear mongering.

    "What if the torture DOES save lives?"

    "What if the Muslims really DO want to wipe us off the map?"

    The GOPs ****ed up. The president ****ed up. The Dems ****ed up. And yes, I ****ed up.
     
    #7 vwiggin, Sep 24, 2006
  8. rimrocker

    rimrocker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    23,120
    Likes Received:
    10,156
    There's a lot of folks thinking something similar.

    By the way, this report was done in April. How many "Stay the Course" statements have we heard since then? You would think something like this might trigger a rethinking of the current policy. But no. I guess it's hard to rethink policy when you have never defined the original policy in the first place.
     
    #8 rimrocker, Sep 24, 2006
  9. Sishir Chang

    Sishir Chang Member

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    11,064
    Likes Received:
    8
    By voting you are doing something. Think about it this way things like redrawn districts and questionable voting counts are like bad calls in a close game. They only matter when things are close. That just means you should work harder to make it not close. Everyone keeps on talking about the groundswell of support against the Bush Admin. that's fine and good but until they show up at the polls that doesn't mean anything. So instead of rioting or leaving the country howabout working on making political change? Help get out the vote, help some a campaign there's a lot of things that you can do without violence or emmigrating.
     
    #9 Sishir Chang, Sep 25, 2006
  10. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    from josh --

    Do yourself and your country a favor this morning.

    Call up your representative and senators -- Republican or Democrat, it doesn't matter -- and tell them you want the April National Intelligence Estimate ("Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States") released to the public. Now. Before the election. So the public can know what the White House has been keeping from them.

    I know the title is a mouthful. So just to be clear, that is the April National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) widely reported on this weekend, which concludes that the Iraq War is making the threat of terrorism worse, not better.

    This issue was knocking around on the Sunday shows yesterday, with folks like Majority Leader Frist insisting it's just not so. But I haven't seen this episode yet called for what it is -- a cover-up.

    An NIE isn't some random government white paper. It represents the consensus judgment of the entire US intelligence community, with input from all the different agencies, from CIA and DIA to INR and FBI and all the others. In other words, this is the collaborative judgment of the people actually fighting the War on Terror.

    For the last six weeks and, in fact, the last six months, the White House and the president have been engaged in a coordinated campaign to convince the public that despite the setbacks and mistakes, the war in Iraq is a critical component of fighting the War on Terror. Making that argument is their plan for the next six weeks until the election. All the while, they've been sitting on a report that says that's flat wrong, a lie and that precisely the opposite is the case.

    That's a cover-up in every meaningful sense of the word, a calculated effort to hide information from and deceive the public. And it's actually a replay of what happened in late 2002, when the White House kept the Iraq WMD NIE's doubts about Iraqi weapons programs away from the public.

    The president has made very clear he wants the next six weeks to be about Iraq and the War on Terror. By all means, let's do it. But first the president has to come clean about what he's keeping hidden from the public -- the fact that the people he has fighting the War on Terror are telling him that what he's telling the public about Iraq and the War on Terror flat isn't true.

    Late word from the White House is that the Times report is "not representative of the complete document." Well, then, by all means, let's get a look at the whole thing so the public can get the big picture and find out who's telling the truth.

    So pick up the phone and tell your reps and senators what you think. Then ask them whether they support releasing the April Iraq/Terrorism NIE to the public before the November election. Yes, or no. You may hear excuses that it can't be released because it's classified. But that's plain bull. Reports like this are routinely and without much difficulty released in redacted versions which remove any specific information that might reveal what intel types call 'sources and methods'.

    Let us know what you hear, whether you get a straight answer and we'll share it with the rest of our readers.

    -- Josh Marshall
     
    #10 mc mark, Sep 25, 2006
  11. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    57,790
    Likes Received:
    41,226
    I posted it in this thread, http://bbs.clutchfans.net/showthread.php?t=118060&page=4 but I agree... it's one of the biggest news stories going, directed to the heart of American foreign policy and arguably the biggset decision of Bush's presidency, invading and occupying Iraq. It has been an unmitigated disaster, and for anyone thinking otherwise, this report should be the nail in the coffin.



    Keep D&D Civil.
     
    #11 Deckard, Sep 25, 2006
  12. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    51,807
    Likes Received:
    20,465
    Well so much for Bush having the right mindset post 9/11. He made terrorism worse, hasn't caught Bin Laden, poured more resources into Iraq than going after Bin Laden, and has had every reason he has given for the Iraq war fall through.

    I guess Basso, Roxran, and other Bush war supporters don't have much to add to this topic. But assuming they believed that it was the right thing to do with regards to the war on terror, I wonder if they are mad at Bush or upset with him for his poor planning, and detrimental post 9/11 mindset.
     
    #12 FranchiseBlade, Sep 25, 2006
  13. rhadamanthus

    rhadamanthus Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2002
    Messages:
    14,304
    Likes Received:
    596
    Obviously dissent, the liberal media, and clinton are the real culprits. Heck, just reporting this is aiding the terrorists.
     
    #13 rhadamanthus, Sep 25, 2006
    Last edited: Sep 25, 2006
  14. NewYorker

    NewYorker Ghost of Clutch Fans

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2002
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    41
    I guess when faced with this sort of wallop, they choose to run and hide rather then admit they were wrong.

    With this report, we can officially declare the the war in Iraq is certainly a part of the war on terrorism.

    The War in Iraq affected the war on terrorism by creating a whole bunch of new terrorists.

    we always knew that to win the war on terrorism we had to fight for the hearts and minds, and clearly, invading iraq was anthesisis to the vary notion.
     
    #14 NewYorker, Sep 25, 2006
  15. vlaurelio

    vlaurelio Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    21,310
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    thank you bush & cabal for being our biggest sponsors

    from: aq & other muslim extremist terrorists worldwide
     
    #15 vlaurelio, Sep 25, 2006
  16. vwiggin

    vwiggin Member

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,951
    Likes Received:
    2

    You're right, of course. I was just feeling tired and frustrated.

    While this story is front page news on the NYT, LAT, and CNN websites, as of Sunday afternoon, it did NOT make the front page of Fox news. So if that's where you tend to get your news, you might just think this report is some kind of liberal "spin."

    Thanks rimrocker, good to know I'm not alone in my frustration.
     
    #16 vwiggin, Sep 25, 2006
  17. rimrocker

    rimrocker Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    23,120
    Likes Received:
    10,156
    Comma? Iraq is just a short pause? Americans and Iraqis who have died are merely a punctuation mark?

     
    #17 rimrocker, Sep 25, 2006
  18. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,075
    Likes Received:
    3,605
    It was also on the ABC Nightly News. My wife and I were wondering about this. How can the Bush backers keep the faith? I was tempted to see if Fox News mentioned it at all or just had the spin that the whole report came to a different conslusion.
     
    #18 glynch, Sep 26, 2006
  19. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,075
    Likes Received:
    3,605
    Well it looks like Bush is going to declassify the parts of the report that support his spin.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12913317/?GT1=8506

    This, too, is a continual pattern-- selective declassifying to help his political goals.

    Creating some confusion is probably enough to keep the Bush loyalists hanging on.

    What is interesting is that with this leak, as we have seen from the beginning, we see again the real military guys and intelligence guys fighting to tell the truth about the Bush agenda in the Middle East.
     
    #19 glynch, Sep 26, 2006
  20. mc mark

    mc mark Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 1999
    Messages:
    26,195
    Likes Received:
    471
    from josh --

    A lot of Republicans are telling readers that it can't be released because it's classified.

    Hardly.

    It's not at all uncommon for a declassified version of an NIE to be released to the public. Just go back to October 2002. The Iraq WMD NIE was provided to the senate intel committee on October 1st. A declassified summary was released to the public on October 5th. And still more of the NIE was released on October 9th.

    There's another dimension to that episode as well. As became clear a year later, in the declassification process, the White House made certain that most of the qualifications and questions about Iraq WMD were removed. So the public version of the NIE seemed far more powerful than the actual classified version. It was another effort to trick the public and it prevented senators who'd seen the report from discussing those parts of the report the White House had kept behind the veil of classification.

    That's well worth keeping in mind in this case since I understand there's already been some earlier fiddling with this one.


    -- Josh Marshall
     
    #20 mc mark, Sep 26, 2006
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 1 of 2

Share This Page